Microsoft: Backwards compatibility is backwards

The Xbox 360 was initially backwards compatible with 279 of the games for the original Xbox.

Microsoft has defended its decision to skip backwards compatibility in the newly revealed Xbox One.

Microsoft Interactive Entertainment president Don Mattrick has confirmed to the Wall Street Journal that there are no plans for any form of backwards compatibility on the new system, saying 'if you're backwards compatible, you're really backwards.'

According to Mattrick, only 5% of customers play older titles on a new system and the option was therefore deemed unnecessary. Whether this statistic encompasses both Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 players is unclear and there is no mention on whether it also factors into the fact that the Xbox 360 was not fully backwards compatible with all original Xbox titles.

By contrast, Sony is being less strict in the backwards compatibility area and have plans to include a cloud-based streaming service to play older titles on its new console, possibly leveraging cloud gaming company Gaikai which it acquired last year.

At its launch, the Xbox 360 was capable of running 279 titles from the original Xbox library, although this number whittled down over time due to new bugs being discovered by players and updates to the console hardware.

Sony's Playstation 3 had a marginally better offering with backwards compatibility with earlier models allowing for Playstation 2 titles to be played from them and all models allowing for original Playstation titles to be run.

Microsoft's upcoming Xbox One was revealed earlier this week and has sparked a great deal of discussion in the gaming community, in particular surrounding its ill defined stance on the second-hand games market.

Share This News Story

55 Comments

i am backwards then, it depends on the titles you look at to be fair, does many people still play fifa 09 (or other franchise of choice) possibly not, but how mach of that is due to lack of servers? I have a ps3 and numerous ps2 titles that i still play because i can't get the same game experience for the ps3 (champions of norrath/baldurs gate dark alliance series).

All this does is encourage me to wait to buy a console till it is 2 yrs old and there is a good selection of games I actually want ot play and can afford as i certainly can;t afford 3-4 premium titles. the cynic in me also says this is a way to leverage xbox arcade by offering 360 titles for download

I think Sony is on the right track. Players will get nostalgic gaming urges. Having the classics available for cheap without having to pull out an old console, or trying to boot that game you used as a coaster for 10 years... Well, there's money to be made there.
MS wants to bully you into new purchases, while Sony stays open to that mountain of Japanese independent game makers.

I think that may have been partially true for the last generation when consoles were almost guaranteed to come along every 2-3 years but the current generation is approaching 10 years and in that time people have invested a lot - they do not want to have to throw it all away.
Anyway with all that power xbox one has surely they can get a 360 emulator running easily enough on the new hardware !

Emulating a marginally less powerful previous gen console is not an option. Also why would they want to limit the new console so that a percentage can play previous gen games? I don't like consoles and will never own one but even I don't see the need to run previous gen games. If u want eggbox 360 games then keep 360.

Originally Posted by Stanley TweedleEmulating a marginally less powerful previous gen console is not an option. Also why would they want to limit the new console so that a percentage can play previous gen games? I don't like consoles and will never own one but even I don't see the need to run previous gen games. If u want eggbox 360 games then keep 360.

Eight cpu cores to (i believe) 3, why's it not an option ? PC's have been able to run 360 emulators for years so again why not ? given the chip in this thing is fairly new and semi-powerful by PC standards. Anyway the 360 is notorious for the red ring thing, so keeping one running may not be all that practical. Also backwards compatibility doesn't seem to have harmed any other console in history ! Just saying.

They won't add in compatibility as to put it bluntly there's no money in it for them. It will be a significant amount of work creating a reliable and stable emulator or it'll cost a lot of silicon to do it in hardware. Those creating new games won't want people playing old games instead of buying the latest and greatest.

It used to be 'easy' to add in some level of backwards compatibility when the silicon was was so simple. It was easy to basically add the old chip as part of the new chip... or you kept so many calls similar.

But we've moved on from those days. Hardware is more complex, the timings much tighter, the APIs on top so much more intensive. There's so much to keep working.

A big reason I like backwards compatibility is that older hardware will eventually fail due to age and it can be difficult to find working consoles. It is also a convenience factor of not have to dig around in a closet to play an older game. The Cloud Option is a good alternative as long as the price is reasonable and maintain the library

Originally Posted by LoneArchonA big reason I like backwards compatibility is that older hardware will eventually fail due to age and it can be difficult to find working consoles. It is also a convenience factor of not have to dig around in a closet to play an older game. The Cloud Option is a good alternative as long as the price is reasonable and maintain the library

I highly doubt MS care about users playing older games, there's no money in it!

I'd go with just get an emulator of some sort if you want to play old games on your "new" console. nobody has really perfected backwards compatibility on any platform, and by far MS has been really the only one who was pushing it in the past, and is even quite frankly the more or so reasons why earlier windows systems where unstable as well.

Originally Posted by Dave ListerEight cpu cores to (i believe) 3, why's it not an option ?

Totally different CPU architecture (Power vs. x86). Totally different GPU manufacturer. Different memory layout. Etc. It's not feasible to emulate the 360 on ANYTHING at the moment, much less the xbox one. It might be possible to convince developers to recompile binaries for the One (in the same way that the 360's 'backward compatibility' worked), but this takes effort on the developer's part.

Quote:

PC's have been able to run 360 emulators for years

Bullshit. There is no decent emulator even for the original Xbox (cxbx, dxbx and Xeon haven't been updated for years). There are DEFINITELY no functional 360 emulators (though a lot of poorly disguised scams pretending to be one).

I can't speak for XBOX emulators since the last console I've owned was a Super Nintendo(and for handhelds a GBA), but I do have SNES, NES and Gameboy/GB Advance emulators and run some of those games from time to time on my PC. Final Fantasy, Breath of Fire, Fire Emblem, and Advance Wars series being the most run. As for older PC games, I finally managed to download a recompiled executable of Lords of the Realm II that would allow me to run it on Windows 7. The only game I haven't spent enough time finding a workaround for is EVO 2 4x4. For that, I just fire up my Vista rig.

So backwards compatibility is important to some folks, especially since my NES ultimately died about 15 years ago. SNES still worked last time I hooked it up, but it's in a box somewhere packed away. If I had an XBOX that RROD'd on me, I would definitely prefer that the new XBOX be able to play my older games.

EDIT @yslen: Heroes of Might and Magic III was awesome. Around Christmas time last year I picked up a nice Steam bundle for HMMV + expansions and HMMVI along with Clash of Heroes.

I've never understand why people take issue with this. As has already been stated, if you have a large collection of previous-gen games then you will own the previous-gen console to play them on...so play them on it :/

Originally Posted by edziebaIt's not financially feasible to emulate the 360 on ANYTHING at the moment

Fixed that for you.

I think it would be possible to emulate a 360 on a high end PC rig. Given that we have motherboards that will take dual hex core CPUs with multiple CUDA compatible graphics cards installed I don't believe the barrier is technical.

But...

The hardware required is way too high end. The time to work out the kinks too long. The profit not there. The brains needed to get it working too interested in more serious endeavours. The risks of having certain titles a little glitchy (no doubt due to subtle timing differences)

Bullshit. There is no decent emulator even for the original Xbox (cxbx, dxbx and Xeon haven't been updated for years). There are DEFINITELY no functional 360 emulators (though a lot of poorly disguised scams pretending to be one).[/QUOTE]

I stand corrected on that then, I just remembered seeing them back when I had my P4 laptop which was a while ago !

Originally Posted by GuinevereI think it would be possible to emulate a 360 on a high end PC rig. Given that we have motherboards that will take dual hex core CPUs with multiple CUDA compatible graphics cards installed I don't believe the barrier is technical.

To translate on-the-fly and in real-time (and not **** up anything based on fine inter-chip timing) PowerPC instructions to x86 instructions for a triple-core 3GHz system? A mere 6-core server isn't going to cut it, you're looking deep into HPC territory. It would be easier and cheaper to actually build a PowerPC based system than to try and do it on even multiple x86 machines.

Quote:

I just remembered seeing them back when I had my P4 laptop which was a while ago !

I can see one major reason for offering backwards compatibility. A lot of people are saying "you have a 360, why not keep it around to play your 360 games?" the answer: Reliability. Not everyone has one of the newer units (I'm still running an Elite) the older ones have developed a reputation for overheating and when the older models finally go it will be harder to replace it if they're no longer being sold.

Originally Posted by BlademrkI can see one major reason for offering backwards compatibility. A lot of people are saying "you have a 360, why not keep it around to play your 360 games?" the answer: Reliability. Not everyone has one of the newer units (I'm still running an Elite) the older ones have developed a reputation for overheating and when the older models finally go it will be harder to replace it if they're no longer being sold.

Even the elite isn't immune to the rrod ; mine recently went that way 3 years out of warranty. The new slim ones don't take the old hdd, so I'm stuck in limbo of deciding between writing the whole thing off, reflowing it, or getting a second hand one with no guarantees that it'll last longer than 10mins.

But it's not good business, MS have paid their dues and fines for the RROD issues, why would they pay more to allow their loyal users to play older games on a new reliable system (thats yet to be prooven)

Originally Posted by InstagibEven the elite isn't immune to the rrod ; mine recently went that way 3 years out of warranty. The new slim ones don't take the old hdd, so I'm stuck in limbo of deciding between writing the whole thing off, reflowing it, or getting a second hand one with no guarantees that it'll last longer than 10mins.

Off topic, can't you take the HDD out of the old caddy, it's just a 2.5" drive which is what the slim takes

Originally Posted by InstagibEven the elite isn't immune to the rrod ; mine recently went that way 3 years out of warranty. The new slim ones don't take the old hdd, so I'm stuck in limbo of deciding between writing the whole thing off, reflowing it, or getting a second hand one with no guarantees that it'll last longer than 10mins.

Mine broke, and I just bought a new Slim with 250GB hard drive and a transfer cable. Left it set up with the cable connected to my old Elite's 120GB drive for an hour or so, and voila: all my data was transferred, and I still had a chunk of free space on the new drive.

Alternatively, just pay Microsoft: they'll fix a broken Elite for you for ~£40 outside warranty.

Originally Posted by XXAOSICXXIf you want to play xbox 360 games, you use your xbox 360. They'll be ten-a-penny once the new console is out anyway.

I really don't see what the big deal is....

You missed my point. I'm not disagreeing on the compatibility point - as you say, if you want to play 360 games, get a 360. What I was getting at was the fact that turntables aren't obsolete and out of production, but 360 consoles will be!

people have wierd memorys, Sony did not do backwards compat on the uk ps3 there was an uproar on forums like this about it, Now Microsoft does it, its not big deal and go deal with it. Wierd how some fokes memory works i guess.

I must of rebrought Final Fantasy 7 3 times due to lack of backwards compat.

Originally Posted by rollopeople have wierd memorys, Sony did not do backwards compat on the uk ps3 there was an uproar on forums like this about it, Now Microsoft does it, its not big deal and go deal with it. Wierd how some fokes memory works i guess.

I must of rebrought Final Fantasy 7 3 times due to lack of backwards compat.

The launch 60Gb PS3 did do backwards compatibility, just not brilliantly...

Originally Posted by rollopeople have wierd memorys, Sony did not do backwards compat on the uk ps3 there was an uproar on forums like this about it, Now Microsoft does it, its not big deal and go deal with it. Wierd how some fokes memory works i guess.

I must of rebrought Final Fantasy 7 3 times due to lack of backwards compat.

The launch 60Gb PS3 did do backwards compatibility, just not brilliantly...

The 60GB PS3 had a PS2 built inside it. It did it brilliantly. You are thinking of the 80GB which used software to emulate the PS2's GPU.

Originally Posted by Virus44Im sure microsoft are getting worse as a company by the day

They do have a penchant for making a good product and then sabotaging it at the last moment by making some cretinous decisions. If Microsoft were a person I'd say that they were self-sabotaging. More likely it is a dynamic of visionary engineers making cool prototype stuff and then the boardroom business types making stupid final product decisions based on greed and some half-assed business strategy that has no understanding of the market.

I have a huge stack of NES games and i was disappointed when they released the new Super Nintendo but couldn't use my collection of NES games.

Backwards computability was first in the Playstation 2 and that was because there was no decent games released for it on day one so you needed something to play. The CPU from the PS was so simple (in modern processor design terms anyway) it didn't really matter anyway.

I know myself that when i upgrade my system i dont want to play last gens games based on nearly 10 year old tech. I want to play the latest and greatest so would be annoyed if I had to pay that little bit more for something I will use never or maybe once in a new systems life what ever system i go out and buy this generation.

Originally Posted by stewisBackwards computability was first in the Playstation 2 and that was because there was no decent games released for it on day one so you needed something to play.

Not true. Well, the part about backwards compatibility being first on the PlayStation 2; the bit about no decent games is debateable.

Backwards compatibility has long been a feature of consoles. Take the Atari 7800, for example, which was released in 1984 and could play all Atari 2600 cartridges - a console that had been released in 1977. The Commodore 128, if we can veer off into microcomputers for a moment, could play all Commodore 64 titles thanks largely to a C64 mode, accessed by holding down the chicken-head key at boot or typing GO64 at the C128's BASIC prompt.

Sega made a big deal about the Mega Drive (Genesis, if you're in the US) being compatible with Master System games prior to launch in 1988, as it used the Master System's Z80 processor - 1985 - as a sound processor. You did need a Power Base converter, though, to make the cartridge slot physically compatible - the use of which disabled the Mega Drive's main CPU and used the Z80 sound processor to run the Master System game.

More recently, 1998's Game Boy Color [sic] could play all the games designed for 1989's Game Boy - and the Game Boy Advance, released in 2001, could play all Game Boy and Game Boy Color games too. Obviously, even more recently, there's the Wii being compatible with GameCube titles and the Xbox 360 being compatible with a small number of Xbox games.

The PlayStation 2, meanwhile, was released in 2000 - 16 years after backwards compatibility was first offered in the Atari 7800.

Maybe i should do some research first before posting stuff. All my memories of console gaming in my early teens are from the dust blowing cartridge era and the different shaped cartridges for each console, I didn't realise that saga (sold) a adapter that allowed the playing of older games but those consoles had a top loading cartridge slot so stacking 2 consoles on top of one another would have been a stretch especially in tv cabinets of the era.

As you can imagine I was probably just a thought in the Atari days but did however completely forget about the Gameboy, Gameboy Colour and advanced BC route (I was wrongly thinking of each as the same, although playing tetris in colour on a school trip to france does prove it was a huge upgrade!)

Are any of the consoles of this next generation really backwards compatible or will/have MS, Sony and Nintendo taken the route to gouge more money out of you by re-licensing the games you have already purchased again through what ever online services they administer?

Originally Posted by stewis[...] those consoles had a top loading cartridge slot so stacking 2 consoles on top of one another would have been a stretch especially in tv cabinets of the era.

Aye. One of the things I hate most about the PS3 is its curved top. Because mine's a non-backwards-compatible version, I need the PS2 as well - and I've ended up balancing the far larger PS3 on the flat top of the PS2. It looks ridiculous, frankly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stewisAre any of the consoles of this next generation really backwards compatible or will/have MS, Sony and Nintendo taken the route to gouge more money out of you by re-licensing the games you have already purchased again through what ever online services they administer?

So far, we've got:

Nintendo
Wii U is fully backwards compatible with Wii games in theory, although in practice some of 'em aren't working quite like they should. This will likely be addressed in a future update. Games acquired from the Nintendo Shop, such as on Virtual Console, for the Wii, however, are non transferable - so you'll have to buy those again as and when the Wii U eShop gets 'em in.

Sony
PS3 games will not be compatible with the PS4, owing to the different architecture. Downloadable content tied to a user's PSN looks like it can be transferred, however, so long as the developer in question has ported his or her game to the PS4. Games that have long stopped selling on the PS3, or that were developed by small indies, will likely not be ported and thus not be playable - unless claims that Sony is going to use its acquisition of cloud gaming specialist Gaikai to stream non-compatible content to the PS4 prove true. That'd require a data centre full of Cell processors, though, and I can't see that happening - unless Sony's got a heck of a lot of unsold PS3 inventory it doesn't fancy trying to shift.

Microsoft
Xbox 360 games will not be compatible with the Xbox One, for the same reason as above. Further, it has been claimed that Xbox Live Arcade and other downloadable titles will also not be playable - although I must stress at this point that this has not been confirmed nor denied by Microsoft. If that's true, gamers will have to re-buy any XBLA games that are ported to the Xbox One - and, as with the PS3 above, if your favourite doesn't get ported then you're SOL.

Nintendo
Games acquired from the Nintendo Shop, such as on Virtual Console, for the Wii, however, are non transferable - so you'll have to buy those again as and when the Wii U eShop gets 'em in.

I thought they had a transfer tool that let you convert your licenses and game saves from the Wii to the Wii U (I'm sure I read on Ars-Technica about the problems one of the writers had doing it because a memory block in his Wii was faulty).

There are plenty of systems that are backwards compatible :

The Wii let you play Game Cube games (although the Wii U doesn't) and the Gamecube had an adapter to let you play GB Advance carts The SNES also had an adapter to play GB / GB Colour games.

The Sega Mega Drive and Game Gear both had an adapter for Master System games, and The PS2 could play PS1 games.

Originally Posted by BlademrkI thought they had a transfer tool that let you convert your licenses and game saves from the Wii to the Wii U (I'm sure I read on Ars-Technica about the problems one of the writers had doing it because a memory block in his Wii was faulty).